[QUOTE=SomeRandomGuy16;33621912]Because back then the nations essentially controlled the economy (mercantilism) and kept their innovations as state secrets. Most economic advanteges, anyways, had to do with cheaper labor or more abundant resources at the time. There is a reason why recipes and inventions used to be kept secret.[/quote]
Mercantilist policies historically have only included monopolizing markets, conducting trade with colonies, banning the export of precious resources (including those backing the national currency, i.e. gold), exporting and promoting subsidies to other nations and colonies, controlling wages and tariffs, halting domestic consumption of goods and services, and controlling trade policies in regards to other nations. It was really only a big thing in Europe, not the Middle East or Asia. But that aside, innovations were still made by people who genuinely cared about advancing technology and civilization and had true interest in their field(s) of expertise there and elsewhere. And lots of money was made off them.
The only people who were secretive about their trade were the Italian glass makers, because it was a precious commodity and they were considered to be the top-of-the-line producers. They used to isolate them on islands and keep them there under pain of death (if they attempted to leave, that is of course).
[QUOTE=SomeRandomGuy16;33621912]Nowadays, patents are needed because otherwise companies could just buy another company's stuff and then take it apart and use everything they did. Patents just allow you to go public with an invention more easily and encourage innovation.[/QUOTE]
All patents do now is put restrictions on everything under the sun for the sake of companies, not their original creators. And, consequently, hampers progress. Plus, it's become a very dangerous thing which is in many cases abused; genetics has even become a subject targeted by the patenting process.
There's no way in hell a republican is winning. You forget that 50% of the country usually will blindly vote republican anyways.
Also if you ask what a "generic republican" is to an actual generic republican you'll get one of two answers
Ronald Regan
White Jesus
[QUOTE=Aredbomb;33622031]You're underestimating the power of incumbency, as most Americans do. Swing states may be easy to manipulate but there are factors that always affect them, and incumbency is without a doubt the biggest one.[/QUOTE]
I understand the power of incumbency, but I do not think it will be enough to save Obama. Bush Sr's approval rate was a lot higher than Obama's a year before his election, but he still lost.
[QUOTE=LunchboxOfDoom;33622104]Mercantilist policies historically have only included monopolizing markets, conducting trade with colonies, banning the export of precious resources (including those backing the national currency, i.e. gold), exporting and promoting subsidies to other nations and colonies, controlling wages and tariffs, halting domestic consumption of goods and services, and controlling trade policies in regards to other nations. It was really only a big thing in Europe, not the Middle East or Asia. But that aside, innovations were still made by people who genuinely cared about advancing technology and civilization and had true interest in their field(s) of expertise there and elsewhere. And lots of money was made off them.
The only people who were secretive about their trade were the Italian glass makers, because it was a precious commodity and they were considered to be the top-of-the-line producers. They used to isolate them on islands and keep them there under pain of death (if they attempted to leave, that is of course).[/QUOTE]
Wow way to disregard all of the various industrial innovations developed in England that were considered state secrets and allowed Britain to become an economic force (until an American went to Britain and memorized the plans and then came back).
ITT: All Americans discuss their moving plans for Canada.
[QUOTE=Lachz0r;33621076]oh god if ANY of the possible republican candidates get into office that will be fucked[/QUOTE]
John Huntsman seems okay. I'd take him over any of the other Reps.
It's either going to be Romney or Gingrich. Romney actually seems pretty well versed in economics and has a great business sense, but since he is conservative and Mormon it's a big turn off to many people (especially a lot of people here probably). Gingrich is just an idiot and has a LOT of baggage. He's smart, but just an idiot. I don't like obama either. Going to have to write in Megaman for president again I guess.
[QUOTE=thisispain;33621848]500 BC?[/QUOTE]
why would you even need to patent anything that long ago?
before mass production every artisan had a fairly unique manner of design
[QUOTE=SomeRandomGuy16;33622137]Wow way to disregard all of the various industrial innovations developed in England that were considered state secrets and allowed Britain to become an economic force (until an American went to Britain and memorized the plans and then came back).[/QUOTE]
I'm curious to know what state secrets you speak of that a nameless American apparently went to Britain, memorized, then came back with and used for his own benefit.
Because British Mercantilist policies extended to the government controlling their monopolies, working with notable merchants to gain wealth and political power (and protecting them, as well, from being snatched away by other nations), aiming to maximize exports and diminish imports, forcing colonies to only trade with and produce goods for them, and made every effort imaginable to control their trade flows- a favorite method being to, of course, raise and lower tariffs (and then there were restrictions on what materials could be traded as well).
The only contact remotely like what you speak of they ever had with Americans was fighting small groups of smugglers transporting stolen and illegal goods. They did the same with the French, Dutch, and Spanish, too.
[QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;33622255]John Huntsman seems okay. I'd take him over any of the other Reps.[/QUOTE]
I have no idea what his stance is, since the major media networks don't focus on him at all.
[QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;33622255]John Huntsman seems okay. I'd take him over any of the other Reps.[/QUOTE]
john huntsman is the only candidate that isn't a fucking lunatic but unfortunately that makes him the least popular one lol.
[QUOTE=OhHello;33621574]Oh god.
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0PAJNntoRgA&feature=channel_video_title[/media][/QUOTE]
[Quote]2,126 likes, 88,913 dislikes[/Quote]
Perry... just give up, you old steaming sack of shit.
Ramussen has a noted conservative bias so I'm not worried. When Gallup predicts this then I'll get worried
[QUOTE=OhHello;33621574]Oh god.
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0PAJNntoRgA&feature=channel_video_title[/media][/QUOTE]
I cannot believe that that's a serious campaign video for a guy who's actually running for president. It's sick that they'd put stuff like that on TV.
[QUOTE=SomeRandomGuy16;33621912]Patents just allow you to go public with an invention more easily and encourage innovation.[/QUOTE]
Patents stifle innovation
The whole purpose of the patent system is to stifle innovation
If you are truly a free market capitalist you should be vehemently anti-patent because companies should prove their worth by making the best product instead of making a product [i]first[/i]
There are of course many reasons to hate free market capitalism that render this point completely moot but lfajkd
[QUOTE=LunchboxOfDoom;33622287]I'm curious to know what state secrets you speak of that a nameless American apparently went to Britain, memorized, then came back with and used for his own benefit.
Because British Mercantilist policies extended to the government controlling their monopolies, working with notable merchants to gain wealth and political power (and protecting them, as well, from being snatched away by other nations), aiming to maximize exports and diminish imports, forcing colonies to only trade with and produce goods for them, and made every effort imaginable to control their trade flows- a favorite method being to, of course, raise and lower tariffs (and then there were restrictions on what materials could be traded as well).
The only contact remotely like what you speak of they ever had with Americans was fighting small groups of smugglers transporting stolen and illegal goods. They did the same with the French, Dutch, and Spanish, too.[/QUOTE]
Francis Cabot Lowell
[editline]7th December 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=Zeke129;33622504]Patents stifle innovation
The whole purpose of the patent system is to stifle innovation
If you are truly a free market capitalist you should be vehemently anti-patent because companies should prove their worth by making the best product instead of making a product [i]first[/i]
There are of course many reasons to hate free market capitalism that render this point completely moot but lfajkd[/QUOTE]
I'm not a free market capitalist so that is pretty much irrelevant.
[editline]7th December 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=Lambeth;33622381]Ramussen has a noted conservative bias so I'm not worried. When Gallup predicts this then I'll get worried[/QUOTE]
[url]http://www.gallup.com/poll/148487/republican-candidate-extends-lead-obama.aspx[/url]
Time for you to get worried
This is unsettling because a lot of the Republican candidates seem tea-party-level conservative and don't have much of a policy outside those views, which in this day and age don't necessarily apply very well
the republican tea party candidates don't even really support tea party policies
american politics all fucked
[QUOTE=Stick it in her pooper;33620999]I will personally burn my house down and move to Canada[/QUOTE]
[IMG]http://flagdog.facepunchstudios.com/?ipe=be2ead19e69922126142c06085adfe52[/IMG]
Are you on vacation?
[QUOTE=deathmog;33620957]Isn't Obama's campaign strategy just showing commercials of the idiotic things the Republicans have done?[/QUOTE]
You'd need multiple 24-hour TV stations for that.
Not that current Dems are much better.
[QUOTE=Hidole555;33622816][IMG]http://flagdog.facepunchstudios.com/?ipe=be2ead19e69922126142c06085adfe52[/IMG]
Are you on vacation?[/QUOTE]
Might be a proxy (web-based, Tor, whatever).
Might also be Flagdog being silly again.
I havent been following the american campaign race much, but i dont understand peoples opposition to ron paul winning the nomination. Who else would you choose? Jon huntsman has an essentially non existent support base. Perry is a homophobic nutcase (evidenced by his video posted earlier), bachmann is just completely insane, and romney just seems like your average war mongering conservative who will change nothing (for the better at least).
People are tired of the same old shit. Why support romney?
[QUOTE=Pace.;33622884]I havent been following the american campaign race much, but i dont understand peoples opposition to ron paul winning the nomination. Who else would you choose? Jon huntsman has an essentially non existent support base. Perry is a homophobic nutcase (evidenced by his video posted earlier), bachmann is just completely insane, and romney just seems like your average war mongering conservative who will change nothing (for the better at least).
People are tired of the same old shit. Why support romney?[/QUOTE]
Because Romney has experience and a good resume, really. He also has no real definable political views so everyone thinks they agree with him
Not to mention Ron Paul is shitballs insane.
[QUOTE=7DeadlySyns;33620721]God damnit if one of the republican candidates get elected, I'm going to be pissed. It's not just because I'm not a huge fan of republicans, it's because the candidates this year are especially retarded.[/QUOTE]
Jon Huntsman.
Your move, Mr. Bond.
[QUOTE=NorthernFall;33621821]You underestimate human stupidity.[/QUOTE]
So anybody who doesn't vote for your choice is stupid?
That's an incredibly immature and naive viewpoint.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
